self-esteem without individuality

While I was watching the video, it reminded me of Battle of City Springs. The environments in which each school was dealing with were very similar to each other. Also, the each principle of the schools had a common in their passion for education; education will empower students to be successful through acquiring basic skills such as reading and writing and overcoming the problems generated from environment. However, these two films also have differences. The Battle of City Springs focused more on how the school and teachers were trying to implement the practical methods of instruction, DI, and to make students make good results in their academics which can prove that they can also do things well, thus, they improve self-esteem. I AM A PROMISE show how the principal (and the other male professor) were trying to help students to have self-esteem through showing sense of care for students but did not discuss its specific pedagogical method. However, I was not sure what I AM A PROMISE was trying to say. It is very moving to see the principle and other teacher try hard to show the great care for students so that the students can also realize that they are important people who have great potential. However, the films were not able to show me what kind of result the principle and the other teacher have made through “care.” Also, it seemed to me, through emphasizing they the teachers care, they lead students to think and behave in a way that they are “expected.” Thus, having self-esteem is listening to the teachers and making good results as others, which ironically neglect individuality of each student. Students are “talented, intelligent, and gifted,” but the film failed to show me that how the school respect the diversity in students’ talents. It seemed to me certain talents are respected and admired but other talents are neglected.
What both schools in Battle of City Springs and I AM A PROMISE lack is the aspect of critical education. Although both principles aspire that the students can overcome their environment but both did not educate students to be able to see how the power structure works in family, at school, and in community, and how these reflect each other. Also, in both, school is a separated space from the community. School is a space which should not have anything that can reflect the surroundings because the surroundings are so dangerous. The school and the students do not want to be connected to their community. One thing I thought interesting was when the male teacher was having a discussion on race with the students. He was trying to teach the danger of generalization. However, the environment that they children are in is so frustrating which it is hard for the children to be able to apply what they learn in the class. Then, I wonder how Makiguchi would define community when they are ready to see the bond between and school, community and themselves.